Given it's Sunday, and in DC church goers are by long tradition allowed by the police to park in traffic lanes during services, where is this traffic lane located? Near a church by any chance?

by Lance on Jan 1, 2012 1:35 pm  

As the city's populace is rapidly becoming more educated and wealthy, politicians/opportunists like Vincent Orange, Kwame Brown, Vince Grey and Harry Thomas will have an increasingly difficult time getting elected. Dirt poor people that cannot read or perform basic addition and subtraction are becoming fewer and far between, at least on the DC side of Southern Avenue, and that's a good thing.

by Jeff on Jan 1, 2012 1:44 pm  

Vince Orange is an un- self-aware self-parody.

by oboe on Jan 1, 2012 2:00 pm  

Good thing you didn't put a note under his windshield wiper, leaving the poor guy with no choice but to litter.

by Mister Fed Up on Jan 1, 2012 2:11 pm  

Was that previously an on-street parking area with meters?

Regardless, wrong is wrong, but I hope this doesn't become a blog where every traffic violation is posted simply to villify offenders. I come here hoping to see intelligent discussions and would hate to see this become a paparazzi-style forum for offenses that clash with the ideals of the blog.

by selxic on Jan 1, 2012 2:14 pm  

I think the fact that this is a councilmember parking in what is very clearly NOT a parking space is the offense. Of all people, our leaders should be held to account for stuff like this.

by OctaviusIII on Jan 1, 2012 2:17 pm  

1. This is the 15th street cycle track, not a car lane. Parking there forces bicyclists to go into the street and mix with traffic. While not a huge burden, the whole point of the cycle track is to provide a safe path for bikes, not church parking.
2. How can Vincent Orange afford a Cadillac (base price for 2010 DTS is around $50k) on a salary of $125K a year? The fact that he can afford a luxury car (presumably from his "other job"), and the fact that he and the other members (Harry Thomas) feel the need to buy such luxury items and live the high life even as they serve as public servants, indicates something deeply wrong with these political dynasties.

by D on Jan 1, 2012 2:24 pm  

Except we don't know yet if he is parked illegally. If he is attending church near that spot on a Sunday, then he is legally parked. We don't have all the facts here

by Lance on Jan 1, 2012 2:25 pm  

I recognize the building. It's the 1200 block of 15th Street, basically at M Street. The only churches are a block over at Thomas Circle, but I can't imagine he'd be parking there to go to church. And even if he were, just because the city has a habit of not enforcing parking laws on Sundays does not mean that it is legal to park in anywhere. Parking in a clearly demarcated lane like that is no better than parking up on the sidewalk.

by Adam L on Jan 1, 2012 2:40 pm  

@Adam, Also if he was on city business he can legally in certain circumstances where we can't. I'd hope a bike lane isn't one of those spots. But maybe?

by Lance on Jan 1, 2012 2:49 pm  

He's posted an apology on Twitter.

by Keith Ivey on Jan 1, 2012 2:51 pm  

On the slight chance that Orange was parking to attend church ge should know better than to park,in a spot that poses a significant safety hazard. Sunday morning on,new years day is not a tough time to park. If he must park in an illegal spot to get to church then he should pick one that poses less of a safety hazard. Given that there were only 3 cars parked in the cycletrack, it seems like the rest of the church found elsewhere to park.

I think its important to post pictures like this and discuss them because there are plenty of CM apologists who seem to think the CMs can do no wrong.

by Falls Church on Jan 1, 2012 3:21 pm  

D, is your second point supposed to be taken seriously?

by selxic on Jan 1, 2012 3:54 pm  

@Lance, he can park in the traffic lane to the left of the cycle track. That's where everyone else has been parking since the track was installed. There's no reason to do city business (or church business) in the cycle track when there is a(n) (apparently) perfectly legal-- empty-- parking spot just four feet to the left.

What makes this particularly infuriating is that parking in a cycle track is much more dangerous than simply parking in a bike lane: parking in a two-way, protected cycle track forces northbound cyclists, some of whom aren't all that comfortable riding in mixed traffic, to ride in opposing traffic in the southbound general traffic lanes. (And it always seems to be big cars or trucks in those tracks, so cyclists can't see around them!)

I don't know how anyone can park in a cycle track without thinking "hey, I'm not only being rude and inconsiderate-- like standing on the left on an escalator-- I'm also potentially endangering someone else's life... which is OK since I'm going to church and/or I'm a local bigwig."

by Steven Harrell on Jan 1, 2012 4:51 pm  

I saw this today as well and sent in a pic. This was DEFINITELY NOT a driving lane. It was in the bike lane. And since it was a one-way street (this was on 15th one block south of Mass Ave), I had to bike facing traffic in the car lane. There was plenty of on-street parking and I don't think there is any church near that location (I might be wrong on that point).

I don't have any opinions on parking for church (IF it had been a car lane), nor do I think this blog should be used to vilify anyone, but when a council member can't even be bothered with the easy-to-follow rules, I don't particular trust them with the more challenging demands of the position.

(oh - and I saw another cyclist stop and take a pic, too...many of us were perturbed)

by Daniel on Jan 1, 2012 4:59 pm  

I come here hoping to see intelligent discussions and would hate to see this become a paparazzi-style forum for offenses that clash with the ideals of the blog.

I don't think that holding ignorant elected officials accountable is in any way a sort of clash with the ideals of the blog. In fact, it is part and parcel of the ideals of this blog.

For all you apologists for malice and incompetence, shame on you.

by Tyro on Jan 1, 2012 6:13 pm  

He's posted an apology on Twitter.

I find an apology without an explanation wanting. Did he not know it was a cycle track? Did he not know one could not park there EVER? Maybe he was on critical time-sensitive city business and could not afford to waste time parking legally (and apparently as other have said 4 feet over)?

If he is sorry about blocking the lane then why did he do it in the first place? Maybe he's just sorry he caught called out for it.

by JeffB on Jan 1, 2012 7:44 pm  

I live in the neighborhood and see people parked in the cycle track on the weekends, I think out of ignorance. But if anyone should know what a bike lane looks like in DC it should be one of our council members. So, either he did it deliberately or he's an idiot.

by Joe Flood on Jan 1, 2012 8:39 pm  

Does he park in front of curb cuts and driveways, too?

by Steve on Jan 1, 2012 9:26 pm  

One of our most historic churches in Washington DC is Metropolitian AME at 1518 M Street Northwest. This is where Frederick Douglass' funeral was held as well as the DC funeral for Rosa Parks.

However, I cannot understand why a car is parked in the cycle lanes?

by tour guide on Jan 1, 2012 9:28 pm  

Aargh, Lance, it's not a legal place for cars to be at ANY TIME. May as well hop the curb and totally block the sidewalk if church parking is ok literally anywhere. Any completely ignoring traffic and parking laws due to a bogus "tradition" is simply wrong. Going to church is voluntary, to begin with, there are legal spaces just a little further away, AND you can always take the Metro or bus or Circulator or walk or bikeshare to services. Or, choose to attend a church in Maryland rather than commuting to DC on Sundays...

by MrTinDC on Jan 1, 2012 11:06 pm  

What's with the pink air freshener?

by TGEOA on Jan 1, 2012 11:49 pm  

Though a small offense, it's one more symptom of the culture of arrogance that many of our elected officials embrace. It's no shock. These guys often do things that sicken me.

by mikeytheshow on Jan 2, 2012 7:41 am  

I reckon he was doing cyclists a favor. Those bike tracks are death traps. Cyclists are safer on the road.

by Ian Brett Cooper on Jan 2, 2012 8:44 am  

I have to say that is a pretty ostentatious car. You could afford it on a salary of $125,000, you'd be stupid too but you could. His car payment on that is probably close to somewhere between $700 and $800 a month depending on how much of a down payment he had. That would only be about 10% of his monthly salary.

It just looks like a classic demonstration of conspicuous consumption. To me though it screams fiscal irresponsibility. In my opinion he'd be better off putting that $700 a month into a 401k rather than a car that is going to only last 6 or 7 years (on average). I don't think it makes him a bad person if that's how he wants to spend his money. However, I think that speaks to the mindset of the individual and makes me less likely to want to elect him manage the city budget and determine how my tax dollars are spent. It's a really minor quibble though. There are issues I care much more about.

by Doug on Jan 2, 2012 10:45 am  

True to form the GGW radicals are complaining over the cost of somebody else's car - one they did not buy. What a way to start the New Year. Where's Courtland Milloy when you need him.

Not surprisingly though, the commentariat is able to refer to Orange as an "idiot" in a way I am sure would not apply to other (more favored) pols.

I'll test that theory soon.

by HogWash on Jan 2, 2012 11:04 am  

It's a bit naive to take VO's "apology" at face value, or to chalk it up to ignorance. This will probably be on Vince Orange's re-election materials. Next we'll probably see him strewing broken glass at a dog park.

:)

by oboe on Jan 2, 2012 11:30 am  

Frankly, it's irresponsible that he even has a car, HogWash. Someone who makes as much as he does shouldn't even be able to afford a car half as much as an old CTS.

by selxic on Jan 2, 2012 11:48 am  

@Selxic, I think it's highly irresponsible for you to suggest that he shouldn't have a car. In fact, it's as irresponsible as suggesting that someone should/n't own a bike or rent/own.

That said, I'm still not understand your point about his "inability" to pay for a cts. It's a cts..not a Benz CL65 AMG coupe.

by HogWash on Jan 2, 2012 12:16 pm  

@HogWash,

I've got an old irony-meter around here somewhere you can borrow. I think your's is on the fritz. :)

by oboe on Jan 2, 2012 12:24 pm  

Doh! Where'd that apostrophe come from!?!

by oboe on Jan 2, 2012 12:25 pm  

Haters gonna hate.

by Keep Houston Houston on Jan 2, 2012 4:02 pm  

@Keep Houston Houston:

Don't hate the player-hater, hate the game.

by oboe on Jan 2, 2012 4:11 pm  

Ian is going to be our resident anti-bike-lane troll?

by Tyro on Jan 2, 2012 8:07 pm  

Look, he apologized. It may be lame, but at the end of the day, he apologized for something that may have earned him what, a $100 parking ticket and $100 tow?

That he even thought it was appropriate to park in a bike lane is very illustrative of what he thinks is OK and not OK to do with his car in DC, but there's no reason to continue on about it. If you are not satisfied, work to elect someone else in his stead next time around. But for now, he apologized for a minor parking offense. (Although, it was a dick move, minor parking offense or not)

by nick on Jan 2, 2012 9:11 pm  

Wow...thanks for this GGW. We think this story should earn Orange the name of Honey Badger: http://nationalshitlist.com/dc/2012/01/02/this-d-c-politician-should-be-referred-to-as-honey-badger/

by S.E. Waters on Jan 2, 2012 9:21 pm  

@Lance
Do we have all the facts now? Or there any other extraneous possibilities that you'd care to speculate would excuse the illegal behavior clearly shown in the this photograph? Maybe Orange was pulling over to let a funeral pass by, and then get out of his Escalade to help a little old lady cross the street? Maybe the Rapture took Councilman Orange, and his creamy Escalade just gently coasted to rest in the cycletrack through no fault of poor Vincent? Until we can rule out these possibilities, every other possibility Lance can think of, plus other possibilities Lance *can't* think of, but which Lance posits might exist, then it's totally unfair for the rest of us to criticize an elected official for blatantly breaking the law and endangering lives.

by Paula Product on Jan 2, 2012 10:49 pm  

[Deleted for violating the comment policy.] Like many drivers in DC, Orange took a shot at an illegal parking spot because there was likely no convenient *legal* parking option. Big freaking deal. And the comments about whether he can "afford" this car are silly and borderline racist. Orange is an attorney, worked at Pepco in that capacity. Are you all going around questioning whether the lawyers at Patton Boggs have a "right" to drive whatever the heck they want?

by Jay on Jan 3, 2012 12:46 am  

Jay: While you have a point that the discussion about whether Orange can afford the car is silly, your assertion that there was not a convenient legal parking option is incorrect (leaving out the fact that how one defines "convenient" is variable). There are parking garages on that block.

Would he have to shell out a couple bucks? Sure, but them's the breaks.

by Geoffrey Hatchard on Jan 3, 2012 6:30 am  

Like many drivers in DC, Orange took a shot at an illegal parking spot because there was likely no convenient *legal* parking option.

My guess is that VO did this because--far from earning censure--he knew it would win him points from a subset of DC's voters who would practically hail him as a hero. As @Jay so eloquently put it, like many DC drivers, VO has a massive sense of entitlement, and feels like he can do whatever the Hell he wants, damn how it inconveniences or endangers anyone else. Bonus points if it inconveniences the right demographic group (e.g. "Dog parks for WHO??").

As I said before, I wouldn't be surprised if this photo makes its way into VO's campaign literature.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 9:13 am  

Like many drivers in DC, Orange took a shot at an illegal parking spot because there was likely no convenient *legal* parking option.

One of the corrosive aspects of DC driving culture I've noticed is how people opt for quasi-legal or illegal options with no regard for others. Instead of pulling off to the side when people are picking up or dropping off passengers, they just stop in the middle of the street with no regard for the fact that no one else can get by.In other cities, there's an attitude towards things like double-parking and illegal parking of, "I'm doing what I need to do-- I'll try to make sure other people can get by," whereas here in DC, there is a certain amount of pride, it seems, in not having any regard for others while on the roads. This parking job by Vincent Orange is another example. He didn't just illegally park by the cycle track-- he blocked it entirely with his car.

by JustMe on Jan 3, 2012 10:29 am  

@Jeff,

"As the city's populace is rapidly becoming more educated and wealthy, politicians/opportunists like Vincent Orange, Kwame Brown, Vince Grey and Harry Thomas will have an increasingly difficult time getting elected."
-----
And when the officials elected by those "better" and "smarter" class of voters you so greatly long for do the same damn things as those elected by those "stupid dumb negroes" you so despise, what will you have to say then?

by ceefer66 on Jan 3, 2012 11:01 am  

And when the officials elected by those "better" and "smarter" class of voters you so greatly long for do the same damn things as those elected by those "stupid dumb negroes" you so despise, what will you have to say then?

Not sure how this follows. The distinction is an economic one, not a racial one. The middle-class black voters who are moving into EOTR and elsewhere in the city (and the long-term residents who are prospering and staying) have as little tolerance for BS ghetto drama as anyone else. Arguably less.

It's a function of wealth and education. Middle-class, educated voters are less likely to vote for politicians whose sole responsibility is to deliver patronage and (metaphorically speaking) give a middle-finger to The Man. They just want their city to work.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 11:31 am  

Instead of pulling off to the side when people are picking up or dropping off passengers, they just stop in the middle of the street with no regard for the fact that no one else can get by.

This isn't unique to DC. When I lived in Chicago many years ago, my neighbors organized a trash pick-up day on our block. As we went around picking up garbage, we got jeered at by a non-participating neighbor, "Yeah! That's right, pick up my shit!!"

When you're downtrodden, you strike back in the only way you can, whether it's littering, jaywalking slowly through traffic, or voting for dysfunctional politicians.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 11:37 am  

@Oboe, My guess is that VO did this because--far from earning censure--he knew it would win him points from a subset of DC's voters who would practically hail him as a hero

Not that we lack dog whistles but good grief man! Come on! What "subset" of DC voters would "praise" VO as a hero for parking illegally? Although I'm sure many heard the whistle, it's a ridiculous suggesting oboe. It really really is.

The middle-class black voters who are moving into EOTR and elsewhere in the city (and the long-term residents who are prospering and staying) have as little tolerance for BS ghetto drama as anyone else. Arguably less.

Since when did parking illegaly become "ghetto?" As someone who represents the exact EOTR demographic you just mentioned, there are lots of things me and my fellow neighbors aren't willing to tolerate. But please don't attempt to speak for us and suggest that "parking illegaly" outside our Ward is not one of those. Moreover, you've made this sly "not racial but economic" argument before and I believe you make way too many assumptions.

There are things all middle class families have in common. That does not mean we are all looking to turn our n'hoods into dupont circle any more than all residents of Spring Valley are. People of all economic levels like what they like. I personally dislike the idea of someone telling me what I "should" like because I'm middle class.

Middle-class, educated voters are less likely to vote for politicians whose sole responsibility is to deliver patronage and (metaphorically speaking) give a middle-finger to The Man.

So I assume that "lower" class voters were responsible for electing Orange, Brown, Thomas, and Gray? That is the logical assumption. Maybe you should whistle a bit louder.

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 1:04 pm  

Parking on this block OUTSIDE of the cycle track is, in fact, legal. There are signs underneath the parking restriction signs with diagrams showing how cars are supposed to park outside of the bike lane. They've been posted between Massachusetts and Eye since at least March.

Long story short, the closest legal parking spot was about 8 feet to the left. If that's not a thumb in the eye to cyclists, then I don't know what is.

(And as has been pointed out already, parking in the bike lane at this location forces northbound cyclists into oncoming traffic, making this probably the single most dangerous way to park illegally in a bike lane.)

by KG on Jan 3, 2012 1:37 pm  

I willing to give VO the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not being malevolent or making a political statement against cyclists with his parking. Perhaps it's the Christian spirit of the holidays, but I just assume he's too stupid to know where to park.

by David C on Jan 3, 2012 1:41 pm  

I willing to give VO the benefit of the doubt and assume he's not being malevolent or making a political statement against cyclists with his parking. Perhaps it's the Christian spirit of the holidays, but I just assume he's too stupid to know where to park.

Amen to that brother!

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 1:44 pm  

And I can't tell from the photo but is that really a CTS or an SRX?

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 1:53 pm  

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 1:56 pm  

@HogWash,

Sorry, I'm pretty busy today otherwise I'd indulge your hankering for some righteous outrage. But just quickly:

What "subset" of DC voters would "praise" VO as a hero for parking illegally?

We've had at least two election cycles here in DC where campaigners have explicitly targeted Wards 7 & 8 with appeals to resentment towards bike lanes and dog parks. And you're saying you can't even conceive of a voter who would praise VO (or at least give him props) for "tweaking" bike-lane users? All I can say is that you've got an idealistic view of human nature.

Since when did parking illegaly become "ghetto?" As someone who represents the exact EOTR demographic you just mentioned, there are lots of things me and my fellow neighbors aren't willing to tolerate. But please don't attempt to speak for us and suggest that "parking illegaly" outside our Ward is not one of those.

Sorry, I don't follow. Too many negatives. I would take exception to your point that you "represent" the middle-class EOTR voters. Unless you hold an elected position, you don't. You may belong to that group, but everyone thinks they're normative, and they're often wrong.

Moreover, you've made this sly "not racial but economic" argument before and I believe you make way too many assumptions.

I object to your sly use of the word "sly". On a serious note, I'm not sure why you would think it's "sly". It is what it is.

So I assume that "lower" class voters were responsible for electing Orange, Brown, Thomas, and Gray? That is the logical assumption. Maybe you should whistle a bit louder.

(Who are you quoting with your "lower" above, you sly dog, you?)

That aside, why call it a "logical assumption"? All you need to do is look at voting patterns and how they map to median household income.

It's ironic, I think it was only last week that I said we often talk about the intersection of race and economics on GGW, and you replied that we did not. Maybe you were right.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 2:17 pm  

And before you go all nuclear on me, I wasn't saying that "all voters in Wards 7 and 8 are anti-bike lane" or that "all voters in Wards 7 and 8 are poor" or some such nonsense. But W7 and W8 have the highest concentration of poverty, and the elderly, so are a natural constituency for conservative "anti-elitist" policies. Even if those policies are quite democratic and beneficial to lower-income residents.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 2:20 pm  

Things that actually are wrong with this picture:

1. That pink air freshener looks really silly with what is an otherwise pretty sharp-looking ride.

2. The cycletrack pavement is cracked. Cracked concrete, combined with the wavey asphalt on almost all of the south-bound lane, are wayyy more of a pain in my bike-riding butt than people parked in the lane.

3. VO's not pulled all the way over to the curb. Look, there are cars parked in the cycletrack all the time -- especially USSS cars around the White House. It's annoying, but the track's wide enough that you can usually zip around them. If you're reading this blog and you're a DC "BigWig" or law enforcement person, we know you're going to park there sometimes so at least please just pull all the way over.

Things wrong with these comments:

1. Myopic Twits: It's your business if someone (especially an elected official) parks illegally. It's NONE of your business what kind of car someone drives.

2. Courtland Milloys: Demanding that councilmembers adhere to a higher standard isn't racist.

3. Long-time-locals: Illegal fake church-parking rules are still illegal fake parking rules.

4. @ Oboe: "...for WHOM."

by Ronald on Jan 3, 2012 3:23 pm  

And you're saying you can't even conceive of a voter who would praise VO (or at least give him props) for "tweaking" bike-lane users?

I responded to your assertion that parking in a bike lane would win praises from a subset of DC voters. Whether "a" person would was never on the table. There's always "a person" willing to do any and everything..like murder. Keep in mind, your feelings about bike lanes is no different than our feeling about school reform.

Sorry, I don't follow. Too many negatives. I would take exception to your point that you "represent" the middle-class EOTR voters. Unless you hold an elected position, you don't.

This is an odd one for sure. You wax on talking about what EOTR middle class voters want and I respond by letting you know that I am represent middle class EOTR voters. Then your response is, well, *technically* you don't represent EOTR middle class voters. Oh ok. Not that the DavidC (:0)distinction makes your point any better. But ok.

Oboe 1 -Middle-class, educated voters are less likely to vote for politicians whose sole responsibility is to deliver patronage and (metaphorically speaking) give a middle-finger to The Man.

That aside, why call it a "logical assumption"? All you need to do is look at voting patterns and how they map to median household income.

Really? According to DCBOEE, Adrian Fenty won in all 8 wards. Prior to that, Williams also won EOTR even AFTER he had to do the write-in campaign. Vincent Orange won his recent at-large seat in Wards 4, 5, 7 and 8 where in the former two, the median incomes were about 166k/78k respectively.

Now for obvious reasons, you will ignore that "middle class" and "educated" voters in Wards 4, 5, 7 and 8 voted along the same lines as the lower class uneducated voters. But that's irrelevant, I'm sure.

And that is ironic because when you said that we talk about how race and class intersects here, I questioned it because I don't think it was true and don't understand why you thought different.

To be honest, I think race and class may intersect in what you're describing as what "middle class DC voters" want.

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 3:38 pm  

@ Oboe: "...for WHOM."

You just lost the election, college boy.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 3:40 pm  

But W7 and W8 have the highest concentration of poverty, and the elderly, so are a natural constituency for conservative "anti-elitist" policies.

I don't disagree and this phenom is the same all over the country..if not the world. I guess I don't get the "anti-elitist" policy you're talking about. Orange parking illegaly isn't anti-elitist.

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 3:41 pm  

@HogWash,

Just to respond to your point that you "represent" middle-class EOTR river folks. The reason I took issue with that is that you don't necessarily represent them.

If you say, "I am a middle-class black guy EOTR" you're making a statement of fact. When you say "I represent middle-class black people ETOR" you're claiming an unearned authority. It's, like, the fallacy of composition or something.

That's not to say your unique perspective--including as an EOTR resident--isn't valuable. Just not necessarily "representative". Sorry if you think I was splitting hairs.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2012 3:51 pm  

That's not to say your unique perspective--including as an EOTR resident--isn't valuable. Just not necessarily "representative". Sorry if you think I was splitting hairs.

I think we're talking past each other, well at least you are. :)

When I wrote that I "represent" EOTR voters, it was only in response to your post commenting on what we want. So it never was intended to "speak" for EOTR voters. It was, "well, I happen to be a member of the group you mention and this is what I think"

On another note, you were wrong to bring class/race into a discussion that wasn't warranted. JMO

by HogWash on Jan 3, 2012 4:29 pm  

Hmm, let's imagine an equivalent situation for the drivers out there: jack-knifing a semi across the freeway and then just walking away. I don't care why, but there is absolutely no excuse for someone to weave their way around the little plastic poles ("stanchions") and park in the bike lane, when there is a perfectly valid, legal, and easy parking lane directly to the right.

Whenever I see this, I always wish I was carrying indelible lipstick for the occasion. A friendly reminder written on the windshield really is too good for these rude twerps.

The cycle track is in fact safer: the initial analysis found more cyclists and fewer crashes relative to the conditions before.

by Payton on Jan 4, 2012 2:38 pm  

He is above the law...wished I had seen his expensive SUV (no wonder he wanted to raise the pay for the council).
Just don't re-elect him.

by Carol on Jan 16, 2012 9:47 pm